Matthew Flatt writes: > In particular, see this message from mid-July: > > http://www.mail-archive.com/dev@racket-lang.org/msg09419.html
Thanks, that (and the following discussion) provides a lot of background information. In particular, I now see that the main goal of the package system is to turn the currently monolithic Racket distribution into something more modular. For that purpose the current design looks pretty good indeed. I am less convinced that it will work OK for less tightly integrated projects where people who don't know each other work independently at whatever rhythm suits them on their own packages, but depend on packages from others. Time will tell. One possible development could be that the de-facto standard for Racket packages becomes development on Github, with people installing from specific Github commits rather then going through any of the catalogs, for better version control. That may well be a good enough solution. Konrad. ____________________ Racket Users list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
